151
151
Dec 26, 2012
12/12
by
CNBC
tv
eye 151
favorite 0
quote 0
where are we on the pentagon cuts? >> nobody wants those pentagon cuts, including the president of the united states. there may be some on the left who would favor that. but that's not a dominant position. that's not where the political center of gravity is in the country. i think it's very likely that those sequester cuts are going to be turned off. now, remember the sequester, $1.2 trillion over the next nine years. that's a little over $100 billion a year. so half of that is defense, half of that is discretionary. the kick the can mini deal solution that we're talking about would identify some subset of spending cuts that would be the lowest hanging fruit still available that might turn off the sequester, or they could just turn off the trigger all together. the sequester exists because of a law passed by congress, another law passed by congress could change it. >> good to see you, john. thanks for the update. >> mastercard spending pulse saying it's the lowest level of 2008. high end is one of the areas getting hit
where are we on the pentagon cuts? >> nobody wants those pentagon cuts, including the president of the united states. there may be some on the left who would favor that. but that's not a dominant position. that's not where the political center of gravity is in the country. i think it's very likely that those sequester cuts are going to be turned off. now, remember the sequester, $1.2 trillion over the next nine years. that's a little over $100 billion a year. so half of that is defense,...
14
14
tv
eye 14
favorite 0
quote 0
had added eight billion and programs that the pentagon did not need or want which would cost seventy four b. and over a ten year period now proportionally that's not extremely high when you're talking about cuts of fifty four b. but nor is it ends and if it can and it prevents the pentagon from prioritizing to maximize the effectiveness of defense dollars for security i think it was a nine hundred fifty. they have a speech to the american association of newspaper editors that sometimes referred to as the cross of iron speech where he talked about you know one bomber equals fifty four thousand barrels of we didn't you know every plane made as a signifies a theft essentially from the hungry but the larger point that he was making was that if you build a weapon of war and a bomb for example and you drop it on somebody that money is just gone whereas if you build a hospital or a school for the same cost it continues to generate revenue for generations and so while we certainly need a military and we should have a smart military. just using the military as a jobs program seems like about
had added eight billion and programs that the pentagon did not need or want which would cost seventy four b. and over a ten year period now proportionally that's not extremely high when you're talking about cuts of fifty four b. but nor is it ends and if it can and it prevents the pentagon from prioritizing to maximize the effectiveness of defense dollars for security i think it was a nine hundred fifty. they have a speech to the american association of newspaper editors that sometimes referred...
17
17
tv
eye 17
favorite 0
quote 0
cut to the pentagon's already requested six hundred. twenty. welcome to have thank you sir pleased to be here thank you what impact first of all will the sequester ration part of the the the automatic defense cuts that were written in back last year when they couldn't work out a deal away have if they were going to effect well it would be a fairly significant impact not so much because of the magnitude of the cuts over a ten year period as it is you have to cut fifty four point seven billion in the nine months remaining in this fiscal year across the board in all the programs without the ability to prioritize that so sounds like a mess it is a mess and also you cannot cut any funds from obligated money that is money that has already been contracted with someone to purchase something and in addition military personnel are exempt so what's left you have to take a big swac out of it well personnel is about a third of the total pentagon. and it but it includes all other sensible cold operations operations but that has to do with all the money to ma
cut to the pentagon's already requested six hundred. twenty. welcome to have thank you sir pleased to be here thank you what impact first of all will the sequester ration part of the the the automatic defense cuts that were written in back last year when they couldn't work out a deal away have if they were going to effect well it would be a fairly significant impact not so much because of the magnitude of the cuts over a ten year period as it is you have to cut fifty four point seven billion in...
16
16
tv
eye 16
favorite 0
quote 0
pensioners and savers one hundred forty billion pounds so it's not like they are you know people say oh the pentagon money out of thin air they're printing money at it it's not coming from anywhere that's also false because actually what they're doing is they're transferring money from savers and from the pension industry and from the insurance industry which is now screaming bloody hell because these low interest rates are making it impossible for the insurance industry to operate as an ongoing business here in the japanese voter has voted for what they call an aggressive policy not only militaristically against china but they say they want more aggressive currency war and yet if you look at the last twenty years they've been violently aggressive in the currency war look at iceland iceland has collapsed their economy collapsed their banking system collapsed why because of the carry trade because of zero percent interest rates in japan i remember when we made that film money guys or we cover glenn stevens of the reserve bank of australia who said that there was something very strange about a g three
pensioners and savers one hundred forty billion pounds so it's not like they are you know people say oh the pentagon money out of thin air they're printing money at it it's not coming from anywhere that's also false because actually what they're doing is they're transferring money from savers and from the pension industry and from the insurance industry which is now screaming bloody hell because these low interest rates are making it impossible for the insurance industry to operate as an...
21
21
tv
eye 21
favorite 0
quote 0
just we have the united states we have another country living side by side with it it's called the pentagon and there's just no controlling it it's gone out of hand that's forty percent of our budget is goes to intelligence security and military. and there's also wall street which is another beast which has its own ethic so i think we'll see was that three countries living side by side tentacles reaching far cross the all over let's talk about nixon your portrayal of nixon was that he was a criminal i mean the cia is portrayed as this evil entity almost the supernatural entity or you know one point the movie the director of the cia is even threatening to kill nixon what do you say to people who say that you were too forgiving of bush and your movie w but i don't see that in nixon that the cia director tried to kill dick said we would that we hinted at there was a controversy between helms richard helms and nixon and part of the problems was to cuba papers and what you are it's a dirty story the cia was we nicknamed sometimes capitalisms invisible army goes back to one nine hundred. eighty s
just we have the united states we have another country living side by side with it it's called the pentagon and there's just no controlling it it's gone out of hand that's forty percent of our budget is goes to intelligence security and military. and there's also wall street which is another beast which has its own ethic so i think we'll see was that three countries living side by side tentacles reaching far cross the all over let's talk about nixon your portrayal of nixon was that he was a...
17
17
tv
eye 17
favorite 0
quote 0
the pentagon wants to sell a number of on that aircraft just so we have more on international reaction on that plus. more people used to live in the slums now the economically disadvantaged occupies substandard housing in the inner cities winding voters with semantics later this hour we'll look at how politicians use language to mass but they are really up to that's after the break. wealthy british style moves on it's time to run the. markets why not. come to. find out what's really happening to the global economy with mike's concert for a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune into kinds a report on our. choose your language. of choice we can we know if you're going to kill someone. with the consensus you. choose the opinions that you think are great to. choose the stories that impact your life choose your access to. the news today violence is once again flared up. these are the images the world has been seeing from the streets of canada. operations rule the day. thanks for staying with us here on our t. seventeen minutes past the hour now the pentagon is propose
the pentagon wants to sell a number of on that aircraft just so we have more on international reaction on that plus. more people used to live in the slums now the economically disadvantaged occupies substandard housing in the inner cities winding voters with semantics later this hour we'll look at how politicians use language to mass but they are really up to that's after the break. wealthy british style moves on it's time to run the. markets why not. come to. find out what's really happening...
32
32
tv
eye 32
favorite 0
quote 0
pivoting announced by a bomb almost a year ago at the pentagon if they go with the militaristic kind of thing towards asia then we're going to have a conflagration against china soon within the next few weeks if they go for some kind of commercial alliances with countries in asia individually then it's a much better prospect for the u.s. and for the west in general ok alexander you know began the i mean you know nato is nato a force for good ok because it's looking to the pacific now over. well i mean nato is reaching out to countries like australia and japan to intensify their cooperation but i'll give you an example of that you just mentioned a country where relatively often and that is libya if it had not been for nato colonel gadhafi would have murdered the inhabitants of him god i don't know that we don't know that how do you know that you know the history you know that we. will now that are his or. her we will have this is guy for twenty years thirty years he's a crazy guy don't listen to him and he makes one statement then you listen to him it doesn't make any logical sense at
pivoting announced by a bomb almost a year ago at the pentagon if they go with the militaristic kind of thing towards asia then we're going to have a conflagration against china soon within the next few weeks if they go for some kind of commercial alliances with countries in asia individually then it's a much better prospect for the u.s. and for the west in general ok alexander you know began the i mean you know nato is nato a force for good ok because it's looking to the pacific now over. well...
114
114
Dec 27, 2012
12/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 114
favorite 0
quote 0
when they go to washington, it is not a philanthropic act on the pentagon's part to instruct boeing to build. it is pragmatic. the united states federal government -- unless europe is dollarized, unless they do not have dollars to spend purchasing the net exports of those who have surpluses, then they will stop having surplus. this is the surplus recycling mechanism. thus, we have the 20 years of the golden age. the 1950's and the 1960's. a period of immense stability very low inflation. universal growth. we had other problems. the lease from the macroeconomic point of view, it was a golden age. why did it end? because the global surplus of recycling mechanism could no longer be sustained. why? because the united states stopped having a surplus by the end of the 1960's. how can you recycle surplus if you cannot have it. enter a young turk in 1971. well, paul volcker -- that name may ring a bell. in 1971, paul volcker was an unknown working for another american. henry kissinger, who you may have heard of. before he became secretary of state. he was still national security advisor. volck
when they go to washington, it is not a philanthropic act on the pentagon's part to instruct boeing to build. it is pragmatic. the united states federal government -- unless europe is dollarized, unless they do not have dollars to spend purchasing the net exports of those who have surpluses, then they will stop having surplus. this is the surplus recycling mechanism. thus, we have the 20 years of the golden age. the 1950's and the 1960's. a period of immense stability very low inflation....
159
159
Dec 26, 2012
12/12
by
CNNW
tv
eye 159
favorite 0
quote 0
we want to bring in barbara starr at the pentagon. some of the things we hear about when you talk about insider jobs are the taliban dressed as women with the high jab and everything. we know this was a woman responsible for the attack. what have we learned about her? >> not very much, because the afghans have her in custody and apparently by all accounts she's not really talking. the afghans did hold a press conference and showed an iranian passport. they say this woman is an iranian national, she came from there and married an afghan and became a member of the afghan police force. none of this, again, independently verified by the nato alliance. she went to the compound with a weapon hidden under her clothing. she wanted to kill someone she thought was important. she walked around looking for somebody and came up behind this american contractor as he was walking towards a canteen and shot and killed him. suzanne. >> you know, it's interesting, the taliban haven't been all that vocal about this one, and usually they are quick to clai
we want to bring in barbara starr at the pentagon. some of the things we hear about when you talk about insider jobs are the taliban dressed as women with the high jab and everything. we know this was a woman responsible for the attack. what have we learned about her? >> not very much, because the afghans have her in custody and apparently by all accounts she's not really talking. the afghans did hold a press conference and showed an iranian passport. they say this woman is an iranian...
174
174
Dec 24, 2012
12/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 174
favorite 0
quote 0
be on the pentagon fell apart -- it is not a philanthropic act on the pentagon's part. the united states federal government -- unless europe is dollar rise, unless they do not have dollars to spend purchasing the net exports of those who have surpluses, then they will stop having surplus. this is the surplus recycling mechanism. thus, we have the 20 years of the golden age. a period of immense stability very low inflation. universal growth. we had other problems. the lease from the macroeconomic point of view, it was a golden age. why is that? because the global surplus of recycling mechanism was sustained. why? because the united states stopped having a surplus by the end of the 1960's. how can you recycle surplus if you cannot have it. well, paul volcker -- been named may ring a bell. in 1971, paul volcker was an unknown working for another american. henry kissinger, who you may have heard of. before he became secretary of state. volcker's paper, which are when i read a few years ago, i thought it was the most remarkable document ever to emerge from washington in the
be on the pentagon fell apart -- it is not a philanthropic act on the pentagon's part. the united states federal government -- unless europe is dollar rise, unless they do not have dollars to spend purchasing the net exports of those who have surpluses, then they will stop having surplus. this is the surplus recycling mechanism. thus, we have the 20 years of the golden age. a period of immense stability very low inflation. universal growth. we had other problems. the lease from the...
78
78
Dec 29, 2012
12/12
by
CSPAN
tv
eye 78
favorite 0
quote 0
. >> did the pentagon have review? >> no, didn't have fop once i'm retired from active due any i don't have to submit it to the pentagon unless i use classified information. so i avoided using any classified information but a lot of stuff was declassified right after the war. a lot of stuff was a matter of public record. so i had a great deal of material. the best thing i had was this, any war i ever fought most of instructions were sent by message back and forth. so you have hard copy record of every decision made. because of where we are today most of the orders and instructions are seventh back and forth by secured telephone. it became apparent that we're not going have a record of the decisions made unless we have a record ourselves. any time i had a conversation i wrote down what i said and what is being said to me. i had someone in there who would write down every time i made a decision and he would log it into a private journal that we kept of every decision that was happening during the war. if it had not been
. >> did the pentagon have review? >> no, didn't have fop once i'm retired from active due any i don't have to submit it to the pentagon unless i use classified information. so i avoided using any classified information but a lot of stuff was declassified right after the war. a lot of stuff was a matter of public record. so i had a great deal of material. the best thing i had was this, any war i ever fought most of instructions were sent by message back and forth. so you have hard...